The first time I watched this film it was being shown on public TV WNET, I was about 12 or 13 & thought it was great fun at that time. I had seen the version w/ Steve Reeves ( also available on the Archive as ( O Ladrao De Baghdad) when I was 5 in Drive-In and for me that became the Gold Standard) As comparisons are inevitable I have read a few comments on Fairbanks age & Reeves was really only a few years younger in '61 when the film was released. It was not uncommon in film to have older men portraying younger men I imagine because until comparatively recently "young men were the exception rather than the rule as big Box Office draws. As far as seriousness goes both films are pure fantasy ( as film generally is) and the '61 version undoubtedly had some comedic scenes . As I'm not a student of film the elaborate and exaggerated gestures necessary to convey meaning, intent and emotion for silent film is difficult to watch. On that note perhaps it is my age catching up with me but watching a film for 1 1/2 hours is pushing my limits & over 2 hours is beyond my capacity and I have lost patience with this film & can only view it in 20 min segments. That said I hope everyone enjoys it & don't forget to support the Archive

Thanks for the upload! I found it really impressive for the time. The performances are fun to watch and although the pacing is a bit slow in the beginning, I'd still highly recommend watching it.
Here's my review: http://max4movies.blog/2019/12/08/the-thief-of-bagdad-us-1924/

Love this movie

to reviewer ubang why do you think douglas was too old? he was 39. certainly many 39 year olds are very athletic. this was a great movie. i didnt like the 1961 version with steve reeves at all! too stupid! i wasnt sure if it was meant to be stupid but i sure couldnt take it seriously i havent watched the 1940 version yet but will check it out. but, after seeing this one i dont think the others can compare. :)

Love the movie, but this copy with the RETRO written so as to cover up part of the top left of the screen is a real abomination. Pass this one up
and buy a copy without the STP stickers☹

Incidentally, Fairbanks actually was too old to play this part if you want to be a purest! But the movies are about fantasy are they not?

Douglas Fairbanks was a little long in the tooth to play a romantic young adventurer, yet since he continued to look good topless and his acrobatic skills remained intact, the public couldn't get enough of him. (Though this film was a box office disaster.) Huge, modernistic sets provide an interesting though antiseptic vision of the Arabian Nights. The "distant" directorial style, static camera angles and lack of close-ups fail to evoke any sense of intimacy, which is particularly noticeable during the love scenes. The monsters are childishly primitive even by 1924 standards, though some of the other FX are quite good. A huge number of extras are employed in the film's closing minutes, which was what the public had come to expect in an epic -- that is until the Depression severely limited studio budgets. This is an interesting movie that's well worth watching, but it isn't one of the silent era's greats. FOOTNOTES: The exotic Anna May Wong has a supporting role as a treacherous handmaiden. Also, there are at least nine different films titled or alternately titled "The Thief of Bagdad." Without question, the finest of them is the Korda family's magnificent 1940 production, starring Conrad Viedt, Sabu, June Duprez and John Justin, supported by Rex Ingram as the gigantic jinni. To this day it stands alone as the greatest Arabian Nights fantasy. A beautifully restored version is available on DVD.

Great fun and a wonderful story- from beginning to end a fantastic film.

This is the best Douglas Fairbanks film I've seen, and by far one of the best of any silent film I've ever seen!

The plot is suspensful, the acting is great, the score is wonderful, and the special effects are stunning. Fairbanks really outdid himself in this movie.

It's a great movie, but but that soundtrack is a recent addition and is still under copyright. Rent the proper DVD and you can see it in a resolution that does some justice to the fine work of the movie makers.

This one is worth watching twice, for the elaborate sets, the special effects (I still haven't figured out how they did such a realistic underwater sequence), and Fairbanks' acting as well as his athletics. For this being a silent movie, the life and mindset of a thief and the real remorse he felt upon finding beauty and then getting religion are conveyed very well.

Was this story built on an existing legend, or is the original tale? It's very good. I like it even better than the later version with Sabu.

The soundtrack is also excellent, and the print is pretty good. Five stars for this one.

... that Retro logo at the top is too distracting. It should be in a bottom corner and transparent.
I don't mind the subtitles so much but wish there was some way they could have been added in some space underneath the actual film, not right on top of it. (No idea if that was even possible, just saying wish it was.)

5 star film, 3 stars for this particular rendering due mostly to the Retro logo and also the subtitles (as they stand) being distractions.

Please note this silent movie has
Spanish subtitles over the original titles. Being spanish myself, I don't mind it, but english speaking people could be upset by it.